Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Comic Book Artist
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was no consensus. Views are evenly split, and no new arguments presented in the past two weeks. Owen× ☎ 22:14, 3 May 2026 (UTC)
Comic Book Artist
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Comic Book Artist (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Note: This merge proposal was originally opened on the article's talk page. Following the March 2026 RfC, formal merge discussions are now held at AfD rather than the historical Proposed article mergers process (PAM). I've moved the discussion accordingly per WP:TPO.
I propose merging these magazine pages: Comic Book Artist, Back Issue!, and Alter Ego into this article, TwoMorrows Publishing. Unfortunately, these are not notable on their own per WP:MERGECON and WP:MERGENOT Lililolol (talk) 19:42, 10 April 2026 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. FaviFake (talk) 20:47, 10 April 2026 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Georgia (U.S. state) and North Carolina. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:25, 10 April 2026 (UTC)
- Wouldn't Comic Book Artist be merged into Top Shelf Productions? It had multiple owners. PARAKANYAA (talk) 21:25, 10 April 2026 (UTC)
- Merge per above. TwoMorrows may be the better target as that's where it originated from, in regards to Parakanyaa's question.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 08:55, 11 April 2026 (UTC)
- I feel like the most recent owner is a better target. PARAKANYAA (talk) 17:51, 15 April 2026 (UTC)
- Keep all. Each one of these won the highest achievement at some point or multiple points (Eisner Award for Journalism/Periodical/publication) for its field of coverage, establishing the independent notability of each (WP:NMAG#C2) and discounting MERGENOT. I don't think sifting through multiple outlets of a publisher to find information on its award-winning outlets as a MERGECON benefit, more likely putting the weight in the wrong place. In my opinion, smaller, focused articles in a WP:NOTPAPER encyclopedia provide a better reader experience. -2pou (talk) 20:30, 12 April 2026 (UTC)
- NMAG is not a guideline. PARAKANYAA (talk) 17:50, 15 April 2026 (UTC)
- No, it is not. Nor are MERGECON and MERGENOT in the proposal. If a guideline needs to be attached to my argument it is simply WP:N. Citing NMAG was meant to be shorthand for saying that the recommendations over there are something I personally agree with, and think other people could reasonably agree with as well, in order to interpret WP:N for the catch-22 that magazines, newspapers, journals, etc. face. To expand my !vote, though, these three magazines are also frequently cited as reference material in the bibliographies found via the GBooks and Scholar links above and in each separate nom if you include the publisher. The three are also discussed in Horror Comics in Black and White: A History and Catalog, 1964-2004 for their value value documenting history in the industry and the nuances between them. Much more briefely, they are discussed in the Bart Beaty chapter "Whatever Happened to the Comics Press?" in The Comics World. Concur that improvements can be made to the articles, though. -2pou (talk) 20:21, 16 April 2026 (UTC)
- It does not pass any aspect of WP:N. Being cited means nothing for notability. PARAKANYAA (talk) 23:34, 18 April 2026 (UTC)
- No, it is not. Nor are MERGECON and MERGENOT in the proposal. If a guideline needs to be attached to my argument it is simply WP:N. Citing NMAG was meant to be shorthand for saying that the recommendations over there are something I personally agree with, and think other people could reasonably agree with as well, in order to interpret WP:N for the catch-22 that magazines, newspapers, journals, etc. face. To expand my !vote, though, these three magazines are also frequently cited as reference material in the bibliographies found via the GBooks and Scholar links above and in each separate nom if you include the publisher. The three are also discussed in Horror Comics in Black and White: A History and Catalog, 1964-2004 for their value value documenting history in the industry and the nuances between them. Much more briefely, they are discussed in the Bart Beaty chapter "Whatever Happened to the Comics Press?" in The Comics World. Concur that improvements can be made to the articles, though. -2pou (talk) 20:21, 16 April 2026 (UTC)
- NMAG is not a guideline. PARAKANYAA (talk) 17:50, 15 April 2026 (UTC)
- Keep per WP:NMAG#2. WP:NJOURNALS is regularly used in AfDs related to academic journals. I see no reason not to apply a related essay to a reliable magazine about historical comics. Kelob2678 (talk) 08:08, 17 April 2026 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.